Skip to main content

About your Search

20121002
20121010
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
obama, but what they have had to deal with, in fairness, is 9/11, a couple of wars that require a lot of spending, the tax cuts of george bush -- i am not sure where you stood on those, but they did eat into the amount of money we had to spend -- and then the recession, which was some say close to a depression. did that time prevent us from being able to make deficits and debt a top priority? >> it should not have. it could have, but it should not have come out if people were thinking clearly, if they were well educated, if they even understood this whole damn thing, which they do not. if you say what percentage of the american people understand this, i would say it is a very low number. it to be everybody, and everybody should say this is my country. people should be very active about not letting anything damaged our country. the one thing we have not mentioned at all, there is no question at all in my mind, if we keep going this way, some nation is going to head over here to take us. if they did, they have picked the right time, right? i wish every american with the about that, all
, if the obama administration does not change it? the issue is the definition of religious institutions, but there is also the so-called top of bell issue -- taco bell issue of individual conscience of business owners. what will happen in your respective views? thank you very much. >> you have right now more than 30 cases involving more than 80 plaintiffs. in one sense, if the issue does not going for other reasons, one short answer is the case ends up in front of the supreme court. you will have a proliferation of cases and in a variety and outcomes that you will end up with a split. the issue is also of sufficiently great importance. for one reason or another, the supreme court will take of one of the cases at some point. it will probably not be this coming term. it may not be the term after, but there is a chance -- it will certainly be the term after that if not. my own prediction, as part of the reason i'm enthusiastic about the suits, is that i think the plaintiffs will win on the merits. i think courts are going to be more inclined to reach the statutory question first and not ge
that these are a part appeared when i look at the history of this issue it goes back to the election of president obama and the real energy he brought on the campaign trail in 2008 to the question of transparency and the good government we all in addition. from my perspective by about 2010 that energy had dissipated. a lot of efforts have gone toward a lot of things. we were not seeing that dramatic transformation that a lot of us can visualize. it was a lot happening very much. that caused me to do some work that i will describe here that result in some great that i will talk about. grading is a kroll art but sometimes a necessary arts. . i looked at the problem of lagging transparency efforts. a look like maybe the transparency community had communicated well enough to the government side what it was we wanted. i sat down with some technical people. i am a lawyer. i have to go back and learn about how these computers worked. i sat down with some data people to try to interpret in language that many policy-makers to understand what data people need. in the paper that most of you have on the chairs, pu
raising the top income tax rate as proposed by president obama or reducing the top rate proposed by mitt romney? >> let me first respond to -- >> you will have time at the end. the question is about income tax rates for the highest incomes. >> i have a 97% of voting attendance rate in congress and i would be glad to talk about this issue going forward. let's talk about this issue. it is incredibly important. frankly, this is what people want to hear about it set of personal attacks. they want to hear about what we're going to do and what the differences between the two of us. my focus is on middle-class tax cuts. we should reauthorize the bush tax cuts for 98% of americans and expand them for families that need help paying for education or child care. i do not think we should extend the bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of americans. do you know why i don't think that? we tried it. we tried massive tax cuts for the wealthy during the bush administration and it didn't work. there is no empirical data that shows it works. this is about choices. the choice is this -- do you think $7 milli
, and that's not just make it hypothetical obama best talk about the university of texas, there was a window -- let's talk about university of texas. there was a window when there was a decision that struck down the issue of race in the circuit of appeals. in that window, no freshman class at the university of texas had more than 4.5% african- americans. at that level, the graduates of high school in texas are between 12% and 13%, so to say that that number, and i take it that although the numbers vary from school to school, to say that number is a ceiling of opportunity, a ceiling for inclusion, is a hard limit. it limits our aspiration -- that is a problem we need to drill down further into the data. i will make one other point and then i look forward to the questions and the dialogue. martin luther king, as i read work,itings and life's did not say that -- he did not embrace color blindness as and illusion that should be grasped. he articulated as an aspiration we should seek to achieve in the concept of -- context of laying down the burdens of segregation, exclusion, mob violence, and it
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)